Document: Webroot Secure Anywhere Cloud Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products (August 2014)
Authors:
M. Baquiran, D. Wren
Company: PassMark Software
Date:
14 August 2014
File:
Webroot_SecureAnywhere_vs_antivirus_competitors_Edition_1.docx
Edition:1

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................... 2
REVISION HISTORY............................................................................................................................................ 3
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................................... 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... 4
OVERALL SCORE ................................................................................................................................................ 5
PRODUCTS AND VERSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 6PERFORMANCE METRICS SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 7
TEST RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................. 10
BENCHMARK 1 – INSTALLATION TIME ........................................................................................................................ 10
BENCHMARK 2 – INSTALLATION SIZE ......................................................................................................................... 10
BENCHMARK 3 – BOOT TIME ................................................................................................................................... 11
BENCHMARK 4 – SCHEDULED SCAN TIME ................................................................................................................... 11
BENCHMARK 5 – MEMORY USAGE DURING INITIAL SCAN .............................................................................................. 12
BENCHMARK 6 – MEMORY USAGE DURING SYSTEM IDLE .............................................................................................. 12
BENCHMARK 7 – REGISTRY KEYS ADDED .................................................................................................................... 13
BENCHMARK 8 – BROWSE TIME ............................................................................................................................... 13
BENCHMARK 9 – FILE COPY, MOVE AND DELETE ......................................................................................................... 14
BENCHMARK 10 – FILE WRITE, OPEN AND CLOSE ........................................................................................................ 14
BENCHMARK 11 – FILE COMPRESSION AND DECOMPRESSION ........................................................................................ 15
BENCHMARK 12 – FILE FORMAT CONVERSION ............................................................................................................ 15
BENCHMARK 13 – NETWORK THROUGHPUT ............................................................................................................... 16
CONTACT DETAILS .......................................................................................................................................... 17
APPENDIX 1 – TEST ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................ 18
APPENDIX 2 – METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 19

Performance Benchmark

Page 2 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

Rev
Edition 1

Revision History

Date

Initial version of this report, includes new results for seven (7) antivirus products.

Ref #

1

PassMark Software

Document

What Really Slows Windows Down (URL)

Performance Benchmark

8 August 2014

AuthorDate

O. Warner,

2001-2014

The PC Spy

Page 3 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

PassMark Software® conducted objective performance testing on seven (7) antivirus software products, on
Windows 7 Ultimate Edition (64-bit) during May 2014. This report presents our results and findings as a result of
performance benchmark testing conducted for these consumer antivirus products.
The aim of this benchmark was to compare the performance impact of Webroot’s SecureAnywhere Antivirus 2014
product with six (6) competitor antivirus products. Testing was performed on all products using thirteen (13)performance metrics. These performance metrics are as follows: Installation Time; Installation Size; Boot Time; Scheduled Scan Time; Memory Usage during Initial Scan; Memory Usage during System Idle;
 Registry Keys Added;
 Browse Time; File Copy, Move and Delete; File Write, Open and Close; File Compression and Decompression;
 File Format Conversion; and Network Throughput (previously named “Binary Download Test”).

Performance Benchmark

Page 4 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

PassMark Software assigned every product a score depending on its ranking in each metric compared to otherproducts in the same category. In the following table the highest possible score attainable is 91; in a hypotheticalsituation where a product has attained first place in all metrics. Antivirus products have been ranked by theiroverall scores:
Product Name

Performance Benchmark

Overall Score

Webroot SecureAnywhere

87

Norton Antivirus

61

AVG Anti-Virus

49

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

47

Trend Micro Titanium

43

McAfee AntiVirus Plus

37

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

40

Page 5 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

For all products except Webroot SecureAnywhere, we have tested the full, retail release of the most current,
publicly available version of each antivirus product. In the case of Webroot SecureAnywhere, the version we havetested is a Beta version. The names and versions of products are given below:

Manufacturer

Release Year

Product Version

Date Tested

Trend Micro Titanium 20142014

7.0.1240

May 2014

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus 2014201417.28.0.1191

May 2014

Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus 20142014

8.0.4.70

May 2014

Norton Antivirus 20142014

21.2.0.38

May 2014

McAfee, Inc.

McAfee AntiVirus Plus 20142014

17.6.293

May 2014

Kaspersky Lab

Kaspersky Anti-Virus 20142014

14.0.0.4651

May 2014

AVG Anti-Virus 20142014

2014.0.4592

May 2014

Trend Micro Inc.
Bitdefender Antivirus
Plus
Webroot Software,
Inc.
Symantec Corp

AVG Technologies

Performance Benchmark

Product Name

Page 6 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

We have selected a set of objective metrics which provide a comprehensive and realistic indication of the areas inwhich an antivirus may impact system performance for end users. Our metrics test the impact of the antivirus
software on common tasks that end-users would perform on a daily basis.
All of PassMark Software’s test methods can be replicated by third parties using the same environment to obtain
similar benchmark results. Detailed descriptions of the methodologies used in our tests are available as “Appendix
2 – Methodology Description” of this report.

The speed and ease of the installation process will strongly influence the user’s first impression of the antivirus
software. This test measures the minimum installation time required by the antivirus software to be fully
functional and ready for use by the end user. Lower installation times represent antivirus products which arequicker for a user to install.

In offering new features and functionality to users, antivirus software products tend to increase in size with eachnew release. Although new technologies push the size limits of hard drives each year, the growing disk spacerequirements of common applications and the increasing popularity of large media files (such as movies, photos
and music) ensure that a product's installation size will remain of interest to home users.
This metric aims to measure a product’s total installation size. This metric is defined as the total disk spaceconsumed by all new files added during a product's installation.

This metric measures the amount of time taken for the machine to boot into the operating system. Security
software is generally launched at Windows startup, adding an additional amount of time and delaying the startupof the operating system. Shorter boot times indicate that the application has had less impact on the normal
operation of the machine.

This metric measured the amount of time required to run a scheduled scan on the system. The scan is set for aparticular time via the client user interface.

This metric measures the amount of memory (RAM) used by the product during an antivirus scan. The total
memory usage was calculated by identifying all endpoint protection software processes and the amount ofmemory used by each process during an antivirus scan.

Performance Benchmark

Page 7 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark SoftwareThis metric measures the amount of memory (RAM) used by the product while the machine and antivirus softwareare in an idle state. The total memory usage was calculated by identifying all antivirus software processes and theamount of memory used by each process.
The amount of memory used while the machine is idle provides a good indication of the amount of system
resources being consumed by the antivirus software on a permanent basis. Better performing products occupy
less memory while the machine is idle.

A large registry increases a machine’s use of resources. This may negatively impact system performance, especiallyon much older machines. This test measures the amount of keys and values added to registry, after rebooting thetest machines, following a successful product installation. Lower numbers mean that a product has added fewer
keys during installation and had less impact on the registry.

It is common behavior for security products to scan data for malware as it is downloaded from the internet or
intranet. This behavior may negatively impact browsing speed as products scan web content for malware. This
metric measures the time taken to browse a set of popular internet sites to consecutively load from a local server
in a user’s browser window.

This metric measures the amount of time taken to move, copy and delete a sample set of files. The sample file set
contains several types of file formats that a Windows user would encounter in daily use. These formats include
documents (e.g. Microsoft Office documents, Adobe PDF, Zip files, etc), media formats (e.g. images, movies andmusic) and system files (e.g. executables, libraries, etc).

This benchmark was derived from Oli Warner’s File I/O test at http://www.thepcspy.com (please see Reference#1: What Really Slows Windows Down). This metric measures the amount of time taken to write a file, then open
and close that file.

This metric measures the amount of time taken to compress and decompress different types of files. Files formats
used in this test included documents, movies and images.

This test measures the amount of time taken to convert an MP3 file to a WAV and subsequently, convert the same
MP3 file to a WMA format.

The metric measures the amount of time taken to download a variety of files from a local server using theHyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP), which is the main protocol used on the web for browsing, linking and data
Performance Benchmark

Page 8 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Softwaretransfer. Files used in this test include file formats that users would typically download from the web, such asimages, archives, music files and movie files.

Performance Benchmark

Page 9 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

In the following charts, we have highlighted the results we obtained for Webroot SecureAnywhere AntiVirus ingreen. The competitor average has also been highlighted in blue for ease of comparison.

The following chart compares the minimum installation time it takes for Antivirus products to be fully functionaland ready for use by the end user. Products with lower installation times are considered better performing
products in this category.
Webroot Antivirus

5

Norton Antivirus

62

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

93

Average

192

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

193

AVG Antivirus

197

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

293

McAfee Antivirus Plus

500

0s

100 s

200 s

300 s

400 s

500 s

600 s

The following chart compares the total size of files added during the installation of Antivirus products. Productswith lower installation sizes are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

2.1

McAfee Antivirus Plus
Bitdefender Antivirus Plus
Average
AVG Antivirus
Norton Antivirus
Kaspersky Anti-Virus
Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus
0 MB

Performance Benchmark

301.2

500.0
522.0
541.3
736.7
774.4
798.2

100 MB 200 MB 300 MB 400 MB 500 MB 600 MB 700 MB 800 MB 900 MB

Page 10 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time taken for the system to boot (from a sample of five boots) for each
Antivirus product tested. Products with lower boot times are considered better performing products in thiscategory.

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

24.2

Webroot Antivirus

26.0

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

28.1

Average

29.0

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

29.4

Norton Antivirus

30.0

McAfee Antivirus Plus

31.8

AVG Antivirus

33.6

0s

5s

10 s

15 s

20 s

25 s

30 s

35 s

40 s

The following chart compares the average time taken to run a system scan at a specified time. Products with lower
scan times are considered better performing products in this category.
Webroot Antivirus

1.2

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

1.5

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

2.3

Norton Antivirus

18.5

Average

19.5

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

23.8

McAfee Antivirus Plus

37.5

AVG Antivirus

0 min

Performance Benchmark

51.5

10 min20 min30 min40 min50 min60 minPage 11 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average amount of RAM in use by an Antivirus product during an initial scan on
the main drive. This average is taken from a sample of ten memory snapshots taken at five second intervals duringa scan of sample files which have not been previously scanned by the software. Products that use less memory
during a scan are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

16.0

Norton Antivirus

134.1

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

147.4

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

151.8

Average

245.5

McAfee Antivirus Plus

313.3

AVG Antivirus

352.6

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

603.2

0 MB

100 MB

200 MB

300 MB

400 MB500 MB

600 MB

700 MBThe following chart compares the average amount of RAM in use by an Antivirus product during a period of system
idle. This average is taken from a sample of ten memory snapshots taken at roughly 60 seconds apart after reboot.
Products with lower idle RAM usage are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

4.4

Norton Antivirus

51.4

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

86.3

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

112.4

Average

123.7

AVG Antivirus

185.1

McAfee Antivirus Plus

195.2

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus
0 MB

Performance Benchmark

231.3

50 MB

100 MB

150 MB

200 MB250 MB

Page 12 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the amount of Registry Keys created during product installation for each Antivirus
product tested. Products with lower key counts are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

336

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

3887

AVG Antivirus

4264

Norton Antivirus

5110

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

6678

Average

10836

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

11878

McAfee Antivirus Plus

43697

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

The following chart compares the average time taken for Internet Explorer to successively load a set of popular
websites through the local area network from a local server machine. Products with lower browse times are
considered better performing products in this category.

Norton Antivirus

20.6

AVG Antivirus

42.5

McAfee Antivirus Plus

42.6

Webroot Antivirus

42.9

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

57.4

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

62.7

Average219.3

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

1266.20s

Performance Benchmark

200 s

400 s

600 s

800 s

1,000 s1,200 s1,400 sPage 13 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time taken to copy, move and delete several sets of sample files foreach Antivirus product tested. Products with lower times are considered better performing products in thiscategory.

Webroot Antivirus

8.6

McAfee Antivirus Plus

9.2

AVG Antivirus

9.9

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

10.3

Average

10.6

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

10.7

Norton Antivirus

10.9

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

14.9

0s

2s

4s

6s

8s

10 s

12 s

14 s

16 s

The following chart compares the average time it takes for a file to be written to the hard drive then opened andclosed 180,000 times, for each Antivirus product tested. Products with lower times are considered better
performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

12.1

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

14.2

AVG Antivirus

16.5

Norton Antivirus

19.3

McAfee Antivirus Plus

25.7

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

72.9

Average

74.1

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

357.7

0s

Performance Benchmark

50 s

100 s

150 s

200 s

250 s

300 s

350 s

400 s

Page 14 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time it takes for sample files to be compressed and decompressed foreach Antivirus product tested. Products with lower times are considered better performing products in thiscategory.

Webroot Antivirus

44.8

Norton Antivirus

44.9

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

45.2

AVG Antivirus

45.6

Average

49.9

McAfee Antivirus Plus

51.2

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

52.6

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

65.3

0s

10 s

20 s

30 s

40 s

50 s

60 s

70 s

The following chart compares the average time it takes for five sample files to be converted from one file format
to another (MP3 WMA, MP3 WAV) for each Antivirus product tested. Products with lower times are consideredbetter performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

58.7

AVG Antivirus

58.9

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

59.1

Norton Antivirus

59.1

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

59.2

Average

60.2

McAfee Antivirus Plus

61.4

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

64.6

0s

Performance Benchmark

10 s

20 s

30 s

40 s

50 s

60 s

70 s

Page 15 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time to download a sample set of common file types for each Antivirus
product tested. Products with lower times are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot Antivirus

6.8

Norton Antivirus

7.7

Bitdefender Antivirus Plus

8.7

AVG Antivirus

11.9

Kaspersky Anti-Virus

13.8

Trend Micro Titanium Antivirus

25.0

Average

40.4

McAfee Antivirus Plus

208.7

0s

Performance Benchmark

50 s

100 s

150 s

200 s

250 s

Page 16 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark SoftwareThis report only covers versions of products that were available at the time of testing. The tested versions are as
noted in the “Products and Versions” section of this report. The products we have tested are not an exhaustive
list of all products available in these very competitive product categories.

While every effort has been made to ensure that the information presented in this report is accurate, PassMark
Software Pty Ltd assumes no responsibility for errors, omissions, or out-of-date information and shall not be liable
in any manner whatsoever for direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages resulting from theavailability of, use of, access of, or inability to use this information.

Webroot Software Inc. funded the production of this report. The list of products tested and the metrics includedin the report were selected by Webroot.

All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

PassMark Software Pty Ltd
Suite 202, Level 2
35 Buckingham St.
Surry Hills, 2010
Sydney, Australia
Phone + 61 (2) 9690 0444
Fax

+ 61 (2) 9690 0445

Web

www.passmark.com

Performance Benchmark

Page 17 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

For our testing, PassMark Software used a test environment running Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit) SP1 with thefollowing hardware specifications:

CPU:Intel Core i7 920 Quad Core @ 2.67GHz

Video Card:nVidia GeForce 8800 GT

Motherboard:Intel x58 Motherboard

RAM:

6GB DDR3 RAM

HDD:

Western Digital 500GB 7200RPM

Network:

Gigabit (1GB/s) switch

Performance Benchmark

Page 18 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

As with testing on Windows Vista, Norton Ghost was used to create a “clean” baseline image prior to testing. Our
aim is to create a baseline image with the smallest possible footprint and reduce the possibility of variation causedby external operating system factors.
The baseline image was restored prior to testing of each different product. This process ensures that we install
and test all products on the same, “clean” machine.
The steps taken to create the base Windows 7 image are as follows:1.

Installation and activation of Windows 7 Ultimate Edition.

2.

Disabled Automatic Updates.

3.

Changed User Account Control settings to “Never Notify”.

4.

Disable Windows Defender automatic scans to avoid unexpected background activity.

5.

Disable the Windows firewall to avoid interference with security software.

6.

Installed Norton Ghost for imaging purposes.

7.

Disabled Superfetch to ensure consistent results.

8.

Installed HTTP Watch for Browse Time testing.

9.

Installed Windows Performance Toolkit x64 for Boot Time testing.

10.

Installed Active Perl for interpretation of some test scripts.

11.

Install OSForensics for testing (Installation Size and Registry Key Count tests) purposes.

12.

Disabled updates, accelerators and compatibility view updates in Internet Explorer 8.

13.

Update to Windows Service Pack 1

14.

Created a baseline image using Norton Ghost.

This test measures the minimum Installation Time a product requires to be fully functional and ready for use by
the end user. Installation time can usually be divided in three major phases: The Extraction and Setup phase consists of file extraction, the EULA prompt, product activation and user
configurable options for installation.
 The File Copy phase occurs when the product is being installed; usually this phase is indicated by a progressbar.
 The Post-Installation phase is any part of the installation that occurs after the File Copy phase. This phasevaries widely between products; the time recorded in this phase may include a required reboot to finalize theinstallation or include the time the program takes to become idle in the system tray.
To reduce the impact of disk drive variables, each product was copied to the Desktop before initializing installation.
Each step of the installation process was manually timed with a stopwatch and recorded in as much detail as
possible. Where input was required by the end user, the stopwatch was paused and the input noted in the raw
results in parenthesis after the phase description.

Performance Benchmark

Page 19 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

Where possible, all requests by products to pre-scan or post-install scan were declined or skipped. Where it was
not possible to skip a scan, the time to scan was included as part of the installation time. Where an optional
component of the installation formed a reasonable part of the functionality of the software, it was also installed(e.g. website link checking software as part of an Antivirus Product).
Installation time includes the time taken by the product installer to download components required in the
installation. This may include mandatory updates or the delivery of the application itself from a download
manager. We have noted in our results where a product has downloaded components for product installation.
We have excluded product activation times due to network variability in contacting vendor servers or time takenin account creation.

A product's Installation Size was previously defined as the difference between the initial snapshot of the Disk Space(C: drive) before installation and the subsequent snapshot taken after the product is installed on the system.
Although this is a widely used methodology, we noticed that the results it yielded were not always reproducible
in Vista due to random OS operations that may take place between the two snapshots. We improved theInstallation Size methodology by removing as many Operating System and disk space variables as possible.
Using PassMark’s OSForensics we created initial and post-installation disk signatures for each product. These disk
signatures recorded the amount of files and directories, and complete details of all files on that drive (including
file name, file size, checksum, etc) at the time the signature was taken.
The initial disk signature was taken immediately prior to installation of the product. A subsequent disk signature
was taken immediately following a system reboot after product installation. Using OSForensics, we compared thetwo signatures and calculated the total disk space consumed by files that were new, modified, and deleted during
product installation. Our result for this metric reflects the total size of all newly added files during installation.
The scope of this metric includes only an ‘out of the box’ installation size for each product. Our result does notcover the size of files downloaded by the product after its installation (such as engine or signature updates), or
any files created by system restore points, pre-fetch files and other temporary files.

PassMark Software uses tools available from the Windows Performance Toolkit version 4.6 (as part of theMicrosoft Windows 7 SDK obtainable from the Microsoft Website) with a view to obtaining more precise andconsistent boot time results on the Windows 7 platform.
The boot process is first optimized with xbootmgr.exe using the command “xbootmgr.exe -trace boot –prepSystem” which prepares the system for the test over six optimization boots. The boot traces obtained fromthe optimization process are discarded.
After boot optimization, the benchmark is conducted using the command "xbootmgr.exe -trace boot -numruns 5”.
This command boots the system five times in succession, taking detailed boot traces for each boot cycle.
Finally, a post-processing tool was used to parse the boot traces and obtain the BootTimeViaPostBoot value. Thisvalue reflects the amount of time it takes the system to complete all (and only) boot time processes. Our final
result is an average of five boot traces.
Performance Benchmark

Page 20 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark SoftwareThis test measures the average time required by the software to complete a scheduled scan on the system. The
default scheduled scan settings are kept (except for the start time) and the scan is scheduled to run at the next
convenient time. The scan is run three times with a reboot between each run to remove potential caching effects.
The result is calculated as a weighted average with a 50% weighting on the initial scan and a 50% weighting on thesubsequent scans. Where this option is not available or the scheduling appears to be unreliable, the product isomitted from the metric, and given the lowest score for this metric.

The PerfLog++ utility was used to record memory usage on the system while a malware scan is in progress. Pleaserefer to the metric “Memory usage – System Idle” above for a description of the PerfLog++utility and an
explanation of the method by which memory usage is calculated.
As some products cache scan locations, we take reasonable precautions to ensure that the antivirus software does
not scan the C:\ drive at any point before conducting this test. A manual scan on the C:\ drive is initiated at thesame time as the PerfLog++ utility, enabling PerfLog++ to record memory usage for 60 seconds at five second
intervals.

The Perflog++ utility was used to record process memory usage on the system at boot, and then every minute foranother fifteen minutes after. This was done only once per product and resulted in a total of 15 samples. The firstsample taken at boot is discarded.
The PerfLog++ utility records memory usage of all processes, not just those of the anti-malware product. As aresult of this, an anti-malware product’s processes needed to be isolated from all other running system processes.
To isolate relevant process, we used a program called Process Explorer which was run immediately upon thecompletion of memory usage logging by PerfLog++. Process Explorer is a Microsoft Windows Sysinternals softwaretool which shows a list of all DLL processes currently loaded on the system.

This test measures the amount of keys and values added to registry, after rebooting the test machine following a
successful product installation. The test was conducted using PassMark’s OSForensics, to count the number ofkeys, errors and values that were added under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE and HKEY_USERS. The Create Signaturefeature is used to take a before and after signature of these folders, and the signatures are then compared so thatthe new keys can be identified.

We used a script in conjunction with HTTPWatch (Basic Edition, version 9.3) to record the amount of time it takes
for a set of 106 ‘popular’ websites to load consecutively from a local server. This script feeds a list of URLs into
HTTPWatch, which instructs the browser to load pages in sequence and monitors the amount of time it takes forthe browser to load all items on one page.
For this test, we have used Internet Explorer 11 as our browser.

Performance Benchmark

Page 21 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

The set of websites used in this test include front pages of high traffic pages. This includes shopping, social, news,
finance and reference websites.
The Browse Time test is executed five times and our final result is an average of these five samples. The local serveris restarted between different products and one initial ‘test’ run is conducted prior to testing to install Adobe Flash
Player, an add-on which is used by many popular websites.

We used a single script in testing Benchmarks 10-15. The script consecutively executes tests for Benchmarks 1015. The script times each phase in these benchmarks using CommandTimer.exe and appends results to a log file.

This test measures the amount of time required for the system to copy, move and delete samples of files in various
file formats. This sample was made up of 812 files over 760,867,636 bytes and can be categorized as documents[26% of total], media files [54% of total] and PE files (i.e. System Files) [20% of total].
The breakdown of the main file types, file numbers and total sizes of the files in the sample set is shown in thefollowing table:

Performance Benchmark

File format

NumberSize (bytes)

DOC

830,450,176

DOCX

4

13,522,409

PPT

3

5,769,216

PPTX

3

4,146,421

XLS

4

2,660,352

XLSX

4

1,426,054

PDF

73

136,298,049

ZIP

4

6,295,987

7Z

1

92,238JPG

351

31,375,259

GIF

6148,182MOV

7

57,360,371

RM

1

5,658,646

AVI

8

78,703,408

WMV

5

46,126,167

MP3

28

191,580,387

EXE

19

2,952,914

DLL

104

29,261,568

AX

118,432CPL

22,109,440

CPX

2

4,384

Page 22 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark Software

DRV

10

154,864

ICO

1

107,620MSC

141,587

NT

1

1,688

ROM

2

36,611SCR

22,250,240

SYS

1

37,528,093

TLB

3

135,580

TSK

1

1,152

UCE

1

22,984EXE

192,952,914

DLL

104

29,261,568

AX

118,432CPL

22,109,440

CPX

2

4,384

DRV

10

154,864

ICO

1

107,620MSC

141,587

NT

1

1,688

ROM

2

36,611SCR

22,250,240

SYS

1

37,528,093

TLB

3

135,580

TSK

1

1,152

UCE

1

22,984

Total

812

760,867,636

This test was conducted five times to obtain the average time to copy, move and delete the sample files, with thetest machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

This benchmark was derived from Oli Warner’s File I/O test at http://www.thepcspy.com (please see Reference#1: What Really Slows Windows Down).
For this test, we developed OpenClose.exe, an application that looped writing a small file to disk, then opening
and closing that file. CommandTimer.exe was used to time how long the process took to complete 180,000 cycles.
This test was conducted five times to obtain the average file writing, opening and closing speed, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

Performance Benchmark

Page 23 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark SoftwareThis test measured the amount of time required to compress and decompress a sample set of files. For this test,
we used a subset of the media and documents files used in the File Copy, Move and Delete benchmark.
CommandTimer.exe recorded the amount of time required for 7zip.exe to compress the files into a *.zip andsubsequently decompress the created *.zip file.
This subset comprised 1,218 files over 783 MB. The breakdown of the file types, file numbers and total sizes of thefiles in the sample set is shown in the following table:
File Type

File Number

Total Size

.xls

13

9.23 MB.xlsx

93.51 MB.ppt

97.37 MB.pptx

1117.4 MB.doc

17

35.9 MB.docx

1924.5 MB.gif

177

1.10 MB.jpg

737

66.2 MB.png

15948.9 MB.mov7

54.7 MB.rm

1

5.39 MB.avi

46

459 MB.wma

1148.6 MB.avi

46

459 MB.wma

1148.6 MB

Total

1218

783 MB

This test was conducted five times to obtain the average file compression and decompression speed, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

This test measured how much time was required to convert five (5) different MP3 files into WAV files andsubsequently, convert the same MP3 samples into a WMA files. The total size of the five (5) MP3s used was
25,870,899 bytes.
To encode the MP3 into another format, we used an application called ffmpeg.exe. The format conversion process
was timed using CommandTimer.exe.
This test was conducted five times to obtain the average conversion speed between these formats, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

Performance Benchmark

Page 24 of 25
14 August 2014

Webroot Antivirus vs. Six Competitor Antivirus Products

PassMark SoftwareThis benchmark measured how much time was required to download a sample set of binary files of various sizes
and types over a 100MB/s network connection. The files were hosted on a server machine running Windows Server
2008 and IIS 7. CommandTimer.exe was used in conjunction with GNU Wget (version 1.10.1) to time and conduct
the download test.
The complete sample set of files was made up of 553,638,694 bytes over 484 files and two file type categories:
media files [74% of total] and documents [26% of total]. The breakdown of the file types, file numbers and total
sizes of the files in the sample set is shown in the following table:
File format

NumberSize (bytes)

JPEG

343

30,668,312

GIF

9360,349PNG

5494,780MOV

757,360,371

RM

1

5,658,646

AVI

8

78,703,408

WMV

5

46,126,167

MP3

28

191,580,387

PDF

73

136,298,049

ZIP

4

6,295,987

7Z

1

92,238

Total

484

553,638,694

This test was conducted five times to obtain the average time to download this sample of files, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

Performance Benchmark

Page 25 of 25
14 August 2014